Two Sets of Rules: One for Billionaires, One for the Rest of Us

Jack Schlossberg identifies the threat to elections posed by Super PACs.

Photo by Kevin Wolf/AP Content Services for United for Democracy

At this point and time, it’s hard to select just one policy concern that warrants state and federal attention. We have seen our democracy pushed to the very brink by the current administration, but there were previous actions, in which Democrats were complicit, that have brought us to this point: money in politics.

The 2010 Citizens United decision was the beginning of the end. The Supreme Court reinterpreted the First Amendment finding that money is speech, corporations are people, and that the right to speak freely includes the right to spend freely, too. This decision led to the distinction between two forms of spending: campaign contributions and independent expenditures. Contributions are direct donations to a campaign whereas independent expenditures are funds spent by outside groups to advocate for or against a candidate or issue. Up until Citizens United, both were subjected to strict guidelines.

Because campaign contributions are sent directly to candidates, they can be restricted to protect against the risk of quid pro quo corruption. However, the Court ruled that independent expenditures couldn’t be limited as there was no comparable risk. They held that “independent” groups are harmless and that corruption is a risk only if the candidate receives funds directly. This led to the creation of what we now know as Super PACs, or independent expenditure-only groups that can raise and spend unlimited sums without the same strict disclosure requirements.

There are now two sets of rules, one for you and me, and another for billionaires and major corporations. For example, with campaign contributions, you are capped at a maximum donation of $3500 and your name must be made public. But, there are two billionaires and a major tech company bankrolling two of my opponents with millions of dollars through independent expenditure groups.

These “independent” groups are anything but. By law, campaigns and Super PACs are prohibited from coordinating, but they do and everyone knows it. Through a practice known as “red-boxing” campaigns signal to Super PACs through posting messages on their websites. One of my opponents really cleaned up his site, making his redboxing less obvious. Consultants flow freely between campaigns and corresponding Super PACs. Making matters even worse, the Trump Administration has gutted the Federal Election Commission (FEC) leaving it essentially inoperable.

Since Citizens United, election spending has quadrupled to more than $16 billion per cycle and the share from billionaires now makes up approximately 20%. In 2024, corporations pumped $1.8 billion into the elections with nearly as much coming from “dark money” groups that avoid disclosure.

This money buys regulatory capture. Take Elon Musk for example who spent $288 million to elect Donald Trump in 2024. He secured DOGE, government contracts, and even got a Tesla on the South Lawn. The fossil fuel industry has also exploited this model. In 2024, it spent $450 million to elect Trump and a GOP majority, both of whom eviscerated the EPA.

The impact of Citizens United is widespread. It has led to paralysis in Congress, vanishing public trust, and an economy that has slapped working people in the face. The decision coincides with a society made for billionaires and corporations. The top one percent of households now owns a third of the nation’s wealth. Corporate taxes are the lowest in history. Money buys access, this access buys influence, and influence rewrites the rules.

Even in New York 12, a Democratic stronghold, Super PAC spending is rampant. One of my opponents is taking $5 million from a billionaire. The other is backed by Super PACs funded by a San Francisco-based crypto billionaire and major AI companies.

This does not need to be New York 12’s reality. As voters, we can say that this is disqualifying. We can’t keep doing things this way. We cannot allow Democratic politicians to ask billionaires for fat checks. We cannot claim to advocate for the people we are supposed to be fighting for if we are beholden to the people we claim to take on.

I took an integrity pledge on day one: no super PAC, corporate PAC, AIPAC, or big tech money and I intend to keep it this way. My allegiance is to the people of NY-12, not a billionaire or a massive AI company with major stakes in how the industry is regulated.

Until we say no more Democrats backed by super PACs, we will not see a progressive agenda enacted that will finally deliver for every day Americans. Until we get money out of politics we will continue to see a paralyzed Congress, dwindling public trust, and a society that keeps favoring billionaires. NY-12 deserves better. And I hope that on June 23rd, you will join me in saying no to Super PAC-backed candidates.